CCJ on my file but I live in Scotland??

[TheAnalyst]

I have a CCJ issued in Northampton County Court on 01-07-2004

 

 

The thing is .. I received the notification however never responded to it and have heard nothing since but I live in Scotland, as I understood it a CCJ can only be issued to someone that resides in England and Wales?

 

I also seem to remember reading somewhere that a CCJ would be unenforceable as a County Court has no jurastiction over a person born in and living in Scotland, it would be a decree in Scotland.

 

Can anyone shed any light?

 

Thanks!

[TheAnalyst]

Anyone got any insight into this?

[sequenci]

have you lived in scotland all your life? did you move up there recently? did the creditor know you live in scotland?

[goforit]

I have a CCJ issued in Northampton County Court on 01-07-2004

 

 

The thing is .. I received the notification however never responded to it and have heard nothing since but I live in Scotland, as I understood it a CCJ can only be issued to someone that resides in England and Wales?

 

I also seem to remember reading somewhere that a CCJ would be unenforceable as a County Court has no jurastiction over a person born in and living in Scotland, it would be a decree in Scotland.

 

Can anyone shed any light?

 

Thanks!

 

From the outset I would indicate that I'm not a lawyer and that if possible you should get legal advice. Whether from CAB, Legal Aid funded solicitor, private funded solicitor, law centre, etc. Whilst I can give informal advice, which is proffered to you without any liability whatsoever and on a strictly informal and causal basis, this can be no substitute for proper legal advice. With this in mind I would, for background information and subject to the preceeding caveat give the following.

 

Here is a good, brief article regarding jurisdiction specifically relating to consumer contracts (and particularly Scots domiciled consumers) from the Govan Law Centre (this article is best viewed in Internet Explorer): Can I be sued in England? | free help from Govan Law Centre , Glasgow .

 

The only problem I have with the above article is that its "form defence" quotes legislation which, as far as I can tell, is meant to determine which Scottish court(s) have jurisdiction, once it has been determined that the Scottish Courts do infact have jurisdiction over a case. The issue in point here is in fact whether the English or Scots courts have exclusive jurisdiction or whether they have concurrent jurisdiction in this matter, not which court in Scotland has jurisdiction. Also, in this case you aren't defending this case, as such, but initially arguing for judgement to be set aside. However, I have prepared a pleading below arguing that the Scottish Courts have exclusive jurisdiction over your case and that judgement should be set aside.

 

Without knowing the full details of your case it is quite hard to comment exactly on this situation, however, it would APPEAR to be the case that Northampton CC (who would of probably been acting in their capacity as the Bulk Processing Centre for the England & Wales Court sytem) didn't have jurisdiction to hear the case if the subject matter of the claim was a consumer contract; you have always been domiciled in Scotland; there weren't other Defendants to the action other than yourself; you didn't enter into a agreement prorogating jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the action/dispute/contract and the claim didn't fall under other certain "exceptions" to the general rules regarding jurisdiction.

 

The general rule tends to be, subject to certain specific exceptions, that you being domiciled in Scotland means that you can only be sued in the courts for the location where you are domiciled. Domicile in MOST CASES refers to the place that you normally live, although there are exceptions. If any of the "exceptions" apply to your situation then things get more complicated.

 

Although the court may have had no jurisdiction to hear the case, it is still in your favour to get this Judgement cleared

 

I think you will need to have the judgement set aside by filing a N244 (Application Notice) with an appropriate fee (unless you are entitled to an exemption or want to apply for a remission). I have prepared a pleading below arguing that Scotland have exclusive jurisdiction over your case and that judgement should be set aside. I am, however, unsure if you are entitled to do this since you didn't enter an acknowledgement of service. You may have to seek advice from another board member or, an English legal adviser on this matter.

 

Denied that this court has jurisdiction.

 

I reside at [insert your full postal address]. This is my principal or main home and I am domiciled here for the purpose of section 41 of the Civil Jurisdiction & Judgments Act 1982 ('the 1982 Act').

 

I believe that the Claimant's claim is pled upon the premise that I entered into a contractual agreement with the plaintiff as a consumer within the terms of Rule 7 to schedule 4 of the 1982 Act.

 

Rule 8(2) of the 1982 Act provides that "proceedings may be brought against a consumer by the other party to the contract only in the courts of the part of the United Kingdom in which the consumer is domiciled".

 

By virtue of rule 7(1) of schedule 4 of the 1982 Act the aforementioned provisions of rule 8(2) of schedule 4 of the 1982 Act are only subject to the provisions of Rules 3(e) and 3(h)(ii) thereof, which don't apply in this case as the claim doesn't concern the law of agency and/or propriety, possesory and/or security rights over moveable property located within the jurisdiction.

 

I haven't agreed to depart from the aforementioned statutory provisions by virtue of an agreement detailed within Rule 9 of Schedule 4 of the 1982 Act, namely one:

(a) which is entered into after any dispute had arisen; or

(b) which allows the me to bring proceedings in courts other than those indicated in Rules 7 or 8; or

© which is entered into by the me and the other party to any contract which is purported to exist, both of whom are at the time of conclusion of the contract domiciled or habitually resident in the same part of the United Kingdom, and which confers jurisdiction on the courts of that part, provided that such an agreement is not contrary to the law of that part.

 

Also, I'm a consumer living in Scotland of limited means and legal ability, having been assisted in making this application, and would be unjustly hindered in defending a claim in England to the extent that I wouldn't be afforded a fair hearing in such circumstanes. Accordingly, it would be inappropriate for an English Court to exercise any jurisdiction it may have in this matter (which is denied to be any) and, as such, should it decide that it does indeed have jurisdiction over this matter, should decline to exercise it.

 

Accordingly, this Claim is incompetent for want of jurisdiction and any judgement in default previously granted should be set aside along with any warrant of execution (or other enforcement) granted thereon. It is further submitted that: this court should declare that it doesn't have jurisdiction to determine this matter (or alternatively it would not be appropriate for it to exercise such jurisdiction), expenses incurred thus far should be awarded to the Defendant, an injunction should be granted to enjoin the Claimant from enforcing (or attempting to enforce) any judgement in default previously granted (such a judgement being incompetent for want of jurisdiction), the Claimant be ordained to instruct the removal of any judgement from the Defendant's credit files (held with Equifax, Experian and CallCredit) pending resolution of this claim. I pray for the court to so order

 

Note: This and any other appearance, pleading, notification of intention to defend, etc, etc, etc is proffered without prejudice to my denial that this court has jurisdiction to hear this claim. The pleadings shown above are proffered without prejudice to all issues other than jurisdiction and no admissions are made by me with regard to the Claimant's claim. In the circumstances, I join issue with Claimant on her claim and deny/make no admission* that I am liable to the Claimant as alleged or at all

* delete as appropriate

[TheAnalyst]

Superb and useful reply

 

goforit .. thanks so much for the reply, I really appreciate you taking the time to write up all that for me.

 

I'll give that a go this week and will post back as and when I receive a reply.

 

Thanks again for the advice!

[TheAnalyst]

goforit:

 

Hi there, I'm about ready to send in this form and the fee, can you help me out with what may happen next?

 

Will I be called to a hearing? (in Northampton??)

If I'm sucsessful in having the judgement set aside what happens next, will the claimant re-apply through the scottish courts for a decree or will I get a chance to pay it again? (its only £400 & I'm happy to pay it) Any ideas how long I might get to pay it?

 

If it is set aside will I get my £60 fee for the N244 back and if so who from?

 

Thanks!!

[goforit]

goforit:

 

Hi there, I'm about ready to send in this form and the fee, can you help me out with what may happen next?

 

Will I be called to a hearing? (in Northampton??)

If I'm sucsessful in having the judgement set aside what happens next, will the claimant re-apply through the scottish courts for a decree or will I get a chance to pay it again? (its only £400 & I'm happy to pay it) Any ideas how long I might get to pay it?

 

If it is set aside will I get my £60 fee for the N244 back and if so who from?

 

Thanks!!

 

Have you spoken to a solicitor - Govan Law Centre would be a good start.

[TheAnalyst]

No, I was hoping to deal with this myself and keep costs down plus the last time I spoke to GLC they were unable to help me as I live in the wrong area of Glasgow.

 

Definately think its something I need to speak to a solicitor about first then?

[AnimalMagic]

This may help.

 

My layman's opinion is that the claimant should have known they had no jurisdiction and as a consequence they should be liable to pay costs. But you really need to seek legal advice on this.

 

Just had another thought, if the contract was under English law, then they would be be justified in claiming through an English court, so no sure about costs.

[goforit]

This may help.

 

My layman's opinion is that the claimant should have known they had no jurisdiction and as a consequence they should be liable to pay costs. But you really need to seek legal advice on this.

 

Just had another thought, if the contract was under English law, then they would be be justified in claiming through an English court, so no sure about costs.

 

 

No. Law and Jurisdiction are sepearate (although often related matters).

 

We really need to more info from the OP. Do you still have the original claim form that you were served with. In the first instance you would write to them asking them to agree to judgement being set aside (based upon your grounds).

[TheAnalyst]

Hi there,

I don't have that what I do have is a letter detailing the judgement and how much I owe.

 

So I should write to the court asking for it to be set aside by filling in the N244 and sending in the relevant fee or do you mean in a letter with my argument in it and if they agree then send in the N244 and fee?

 

I never responded to the original claim form at all then shortly after I moved address.

 

The ideal outcome for me would be to have it set aside then given another chance to pay it before the judgement is re-applied in the relevant court or I beleive you can pay it within 30 days after judgement and the CCJ would then be removed?

 

Let me know what info would help.

[TheAnalyst]

GoForIt any more advice regarding this?

[G38JF]

Just had another thought, if the contract was under English law, then they would be be justified in claiming through an English court, so no sure about costs.

 

No. Law and Jurisdiction are sepearate (although often related matters).

 

I have to disagree here... there are a couple of things that change where an action can be brought.

 

Normally: an action must be brought in the county/sheriff to which the defendant is domiciled (which in your case owuld make it the sherriff court)

 

However there are a few exceptions:

 

1. It can be brought in the sherriffdom/county the contract was formed in. For example if you went to the providers place of business in edinburgh and signed your contract there but you live in glasgow, the action could be brought in the Edinburgh Sheriff court OR the Glasgow Sheriff Court

 

2. The actual contract itself can specify both law and jurisdiction. For example if your agreement states something along the lines of "this agreement is formed under English Law and registered in the County of xxx" then the claim could be brought in the county court of that area.

 

The first thing you need to do before sending letters off the to the court, is to request a copy of the contract/credit agreement to which the Judgement relates and check if this clause is provided.

 

SHould there be no clause such as this, and you didnt sign the contract in england then the judgement applied in England is not valid and must be set aside.

[TheAnalyst]

Thanks very much for the reply, thats very very useful, I'll get on to that this morning and I'll update this when I get a copy of the agreement that applied at the time of opening the account.

 

Thing is ... I'm 99% sure actually never signed any agreement, the company is called Viking Direct and I opened the account online, perhaps I chould CCA them first and see if they can some up with a signed paper, I should have also received a correct default notice prior to them taking court action shouldn't I?

[G38JF]

If this was done online then no signed agreement will exist nor be required to - they will have you "electronic signature" by means of a check box or agreement to terms or some such thing, but it may be worth your while checking them out.

 

I have just looked up Viking Directs terms and conditions of sale which state the following:

 

4.1 These terms and conditions and all transactions relating to this website are governed by English law and are subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts. We do not accept amendments to these terms and conditions. Sales can only be concluded in English.

 

So basically the CCJ granted by the English courts would be valid. Perhaps contactng the company to discuss your options should be your next step.

[TheAnalyst]

If this was done online then no signed agreement will exist nor be required to - they will have you "electronic signature" by means of a check box or agreement to terms or some such thing, but it may be worth your while checking them out.

 

I have just looked up Viking Directs terms and conditions of sale which state the following:

 

4.1 These terms and conditions and all transactions relating to this website are governed by English law and are subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts. We do not accept amendments to these terms and conditions. Sales can only be concluded in English.

 

So basically the CCJ granted by the English courts would be valid. Perhaps contactng the company to discuss your options should be your next step.

 

Thanks for the reply, not good news for me really.

 

I looked on their site and the "terms and conditions" at the bottom of the page and cannot see the section you refer to, also my account was opened in 2003 and these terms state "Copyright 2004"

 

Am I looking in the wrong place?

 

Thanks!

[G38JF]

Try this link: and go to section 14.1

 

Viking Direct Terms

 

Just confirm this is the correct site and that you are a personal not a business customer.

 

ALthough it says 2004 the t&C's also state:

 

We may change these terms and conditions at any time. Any changes will take effect on the date they are posted on this site (see date above)

 

and will have in the originals also.

 

Sorry not to be able to give you good news on this one...

 

Perhaps if you speak with the creditors and maybe suggest that you were unaware there was a balance or that you were unaware of the CCJ.. pay the balance and they may be willing to have the judgement set aside.

[TheAnalyst]

Try this link: and go to section 14.1

 

Viking Direct Terms

 

Just confirm this is the correct site and that you are a personal not a business customer.

 

ALthough it says 2004 the t&C's also state:

 

We may change these terms and conditions at any time. Any changes will take effect on the date they are posted on this site (see date above)

 

and will have in the originals also.

 

Sorry not to be able to give you good news on this one...

 

Perhaps if you speak with the creditors and maybe suggest that you were unaware there was a balance or that you were unaware of the CCJ.. pay the balance and they may be willing to have the judgement set aside.

 

G38JF I have spoken to them via email, I think I may have got somewhere but I'd like to PM you with the details if thats ok as I have a couple of questions ..

[G38JF]

Sure no problem...

[TheAnalyst]

I have just been having a look on the MCOL website and it clearly states

 

Money Claim Online is suitable if:

 

Your claim is for a fixed amount of money (no more than £99,999.99)

 

Your claim is against no more than 2 defendants

 

You have an address in England or Wales where documents can be delivered

 

All defendants have an address in England or Wales where documents can be delivered

 

You have an e-mail address

 

What about that, by the looks of it they were in error issuing a claim through MCOL in the first place given that I live in Scotland?

[G38JF]

I'm not sure to be perfectly honest - I would try emailing Mcol and ask them to clarify